Email this article to a friend

In the next two weeks, Bernie Sanders will begin to describe how his massive organization of millions can function beyond this moment and help build a movement for social and economic change.

A few hours ago, Bernie Sanders announced his support for Hillary Clinton for Democratic presidential nominee. It’s a moment both to take stock of our gains and to think ahead. Sanders’ insurgent campaign has made a remarkable impact, but the political revolution it started is far from over.

This weekend, the 187-member Democratic Platform Committee cleaned up some sections of the draft platform, but there is no mistaking the results for the political revolution.

The clean-up was significant, improving language on climate change, trade policy and healthcare reform. Most significantly, the demands now include Sanders’ calls for a public option, a $15 minimum wage, and free tuition at public universities for families with incomes under $125,000 a year.

Not that the initial version, produced by the 15-member Platform Drafting Committee on June 25, lacked good points. It included planks on ensuring voting rights and getting money out of politics, expanding the post office to check cashing and other financial services, and passing a modern Glass-Steagall Act to separate investment and commercial banking. The drafters also called for significant investment in infrastructure and renewable energy, the abolition of the death penalty, and expanding rather than cutting Social Security benefits (though they were vague on how to pay for that).

After a year on the road with Bernie’s campaign, I am proud of all of this, but yearn for what may have been: not just a better platform but the political revolution writ large as Sanders vs. Trump, a working-class candidate versus a billionaire.

While the platform is likely the most progressive ever, with enormous thanks to Bernie and his supporters, it will likely stop short of satisfying the tens of thousands who campaigned for him and the 12 million who voted for him. There is no proposal to end fracking; Medicare for all was voted down; and the platform does not support an end to new Israeli settlements in Gaza or the West Bank.

The section on trade is in many ways the most disappointing. Unlike the other platform goals, which require a progressive Congress—at best years away—trade is initiated by the president. Right now, that president is a Democrat who is counting on the Republicans to provide most of the votes for his Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, which will cost millions of American jobs and accelerate the global race to the bottom.

Increasingly it seems that President Obama, determined to pass TPP as part of his legacy despite overwhelming opposition from Democrats and skepticism from the American public, sees the post-election lame duck session of Congress as his best chance. Fast-track for the TPP, passed a year ago by the Republican Congress, allows President Obama discretion to send it to Congress and then requires an up or down vote in the Senate and the House within 90 days. That gives Obama two options: If he sends the TPP to Congress in early September, Congress will be required to vote before adjournment at the end of the year. If he waits until November, it will be up to the Republican leaders to bring it to a vote in lame duck or let the clock run out.

At this critical time, Bernie Sanders and his platform committee appointees, were determined that the Democratic Party platform explicitly express opposition to the TPP. As it turned out, the Clinton campaign honored the demands of the White House and vigorously pressured its platform committee appointees to support the president and avoid outright opposition to the TPP. Public employee union leaders led that effort despite universal labor opposition to the TPP including that of their own unions.

While the trade language adopted on Saturday is far better than that in the initial platform draft, including general opposition to corporate-oriented trade, the failure to explicitly oppose the TPP means the president will be able to lobby Democrats to vote for the TPP without violating his own party’s platform. Since some Republicans oppose the TPP, those Democratic votes could be decisive in securing lame duck passage. Meanwhile Donald Trump can claim that his opposition to the TPP is clear and that Hillary Clinton is only talking about opposing the deal and not acting when it counts.

The Sanders delegation will now pivot from the platform to the Democratic Party rules—issues like eliminating the nominating power of “super” delegates. The Rules Committee meets next week, and once again the debate will be about change vs. continuity and the populist moment vs. the party establishment.

The future of the political revolution, however, goes far beyond the platform, rules, convention or even the 2016 election. In the next two weeks, Bernie Sanders will begin to describe how his massive organization of millions can function beyond this moment and help build a movement for social and economic change. Bernie’s revolution has brought us much further than anyone expected. Who would have ever believed the stated objectives of the Democratic Party would include a public option or free tuition? The question for millions of Bernie supporters is how to keep this going both inside and outside of the party, in the Congress and state legislatures, but also in the streets.

Help In These Times Continue Publishing

Progressive journalism is needed now more than ever, and In These Times needs you.

Larry Cohen chairs the board of Our Revolution and is a member of the Democratic National Committee, vice-chair of the Unity Reform Commission, and member of the 2020 convention rules committee. He is the past president of the Communications Workers of America and was a senior advisor in the Bernie 2016 campaign.

The mission of progressivism is to find new solutions, not to can old ones. While Bernie's planks are/were both reasonable and practical, they were and are political rather than pragmatic. And that was what made "compromise" both inevitable and ultimately undermining.

A real progressive platform would call on the party to look for local solutions: solutions to higher ed financing, to job development, to urban gentrification, to auto and oil dependency. In other words to solve the problems that 20th century "solutions" have left us with.

Ironically enough, that ain't hard, but it is a very, very long way from the naive and mindless politics of polarities that undermines both our political parties. There are some remarkable models of refinancing higher ed in Australia, for one example, which covers costs but also delays all tuition bills until students have found their careers and make enough money to afford their older costs. There are some dramatic models of costing that education, through early college high schools that use Kindles and smart phones to complement the texts and encyclopedia of the past. There are some brilliant ways to transcend racism and anti-immigrant phobia, like certifying bilingual students as interpreters for courts, business, and other sectors.

Outside-the-box a lot of good things are happening, but too few look outside for solutions.

Posted by joebeckmann on 2016-07-16 09:59:30

A pig with lipstick is still a pig. Progressives have been sold out, their good work trashed, and as Cohen himself says, "the other platform goals, which require a progressive Congress—at best years away—" So, it's not good news. Bernie has betrayed his own revolution. And unions who support Clinton because she's not as bad as Trump will continue to lose members and influence because they support the lesser of two evils instead of fighting for what their members want.

Posted by Peter White on 2016-07-13 16:50:08

Superdelegates should be sworn to silence until the convention. They and the media had too much affect on the primaries.

Posted by Wrily on 2016-07-13 11:52:50

At this critical time, Bernie Sanders and his platform committee appointees, were determined that the Democratic Party platform explicitly express opposition to the TPP. As it turned out, the Clinton campaign honored the demands of the White House.........and in turn the demands of Wall Street.